The new gfx card I mentioned

[Bahumat]

Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTS 512
Author: Tim Smalley
Published: 11th December 2007

bit-tech.net | Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTS 512 - G92 stretches its legs

Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTS 512
Manufacturer: Nvidia
UK Price (as reviewed): £229.99 (inc. VAT)
US Price (as reviewed): $369.99 (ex. Tax)

Core Clock: 650MHz
Shader Clock: 1625MHz
Memory Clock: 1940MHz (effective)

When Nvidia launched its frankly awesome GeForce 8800 GT graphics card back in October, we got an inkling that there was more to G92—the chip that powers the GeForce 8800 GT—than Nvidia wanted to disclose at the time of launch. A lot of our questions were dodged and the company’s representatives avoided disclosing many of G92’s technical details.

Everything pointed to G92 being a more complex chip than Nvidia wanted to let on and guess what: there is more to G92 than Nvidia disclosed at the GeForce 8800 GT launch. So, before I head off for Christmas and give myself an egotistic massage for trusting my instincts with the G92, I should probably tell you about what Nvidia is announcing today – its latest GeForce 8800 GTS model.

Normally one wouldn't get too locked into the ridiculous naming conventions that the two graphics manufacturers (and their board partners) have used, but I find it hard to ignore this one because I can’t help but feel that it doesn’t do Nvidia any favours. Nvidia couldn’t have given this product a more confusing name if it had tried, because in my opinion the GeForce 8800 GTS 512 is anything but a GeForce 8800 GTS.


Nvidia's GeForce 8800 GTS 512
What makes it even more confusing is the fact that there are already three different GeForce 8800 GTS models on the market without adding this one into the mix. Two of them feature 96 stream processors—the GeForce 8800 GTS 320 and 640—and there's another 640MB version with 112 stream processors which was released in limited quantities by BFGTech and EVGA.

So, I guess you’re wondering why the GeForce 8800 GTS 512 is anything but a GeForce 8800 GTS? Anyone that follows technology even remotely will understand that the two GPUs are different – you'd be right to assume that G92 is not equal to G80 and, for several reasons, never will be equal to it.

I could point straight to the fact that G92 is manufactured on a 65nm process at TSMC, whilst G80 was manufactured on a 90nm process, but I’m not going to. Instead, I’ll talk stream processors, texture units, ROPs and memory bandwidth. In order to do this though, I’m going to make things simpler by disregarding the 112 stream processor GeForce 8800 GTS ‘Extreme Edition’ because of its limited quantities and the fact that it’ll only serve to confuse things even more.

I’m not going to hang around talking about the past though, so if you’re not familiar with the original G80 architecture, I recommend jumping back to our GeForce 8800 GTX and GeForce 8800 GTS 640 reviews, as they’ll help to explain a lot of what I’m going to assume is common knowledge over the course of this article.

Anyway, let's move onto the differences...
If you want the rest, click the link

 

[Bahumat]

Just to remember, the GTX costs about £250 so its not much more for the better card, but the GT is £180 and it's only a little worse than the new GTS.

I really do feel the price of the GT will drop due to this

 

[Bahumat]

It’s worth making it clear that the GeForce 8800 GTS 512 is not a GeForce 8800 GTX killer and the GeForce 8800 GTX and Ultra will still continue to rule the roost at high resolutions with anti-aliasing enabled. However, what Nvidia has done is made a similar level of performance available to those with monitors around 1680x1050 at a much lower price point – if you're looking at playing games on a 1920x1200 (or higher) screen, we'd still recommend the 8800 GTX.

Haha for us 17inch flat screen monitor folks it's a tough choice!

 

[ileks]

Hmm so what card would be better with a 24 inch screen? The new GTS (BFG £250) or the OCuk GTX which is also £250.

 

[cHodAX]

Hmm so what card would be better with a 24 inch screen? The new GTS (BFG £250) or the OCuk GTX which is also £250.

The GTX by a good distance, the extra memory and bandwidth to memory will make the GTX a great card for some time to come. The GTS will still be a good card in a years time but the GTX will still be a high end product with high end perfomance due to the extra pixel shaders and the monsterous amount of memory bandwidth it has available.

 

[ileks]

ty

 

[preacherboy]

Hmm so what card would be better with a 24 inch screen? The new GTS (BFG £250) or the OCuk GTX which is also £250.

It's all bollocks, sell great product, wtf more pixels? like you would ever notice give ya money mug DOH OK, bit like my daddy is bigger than your daddy? only fools that believe this crap are the losers

 

[Raven]

Not exactly pip ofc you notice, if you want to play the latest games you need a decent card. There isn't really an option other than a DX10 card these days, even for playing DX9 compatible games it gives you a boost.

I have a six month old BFG GTS and am very happy with it, hasn't stuttered at anything i have thrown at it yet, COD4, Crysis etc.

 

[Chronictank]

It's all bollocks, sell great product, wtf more pixels? like you would ever notice give ya money mug DOH OK, bit like my daddy is bigger than your daddy? only fools that believe this crap are the losers

Depends if you want to play games with the sliders maxed out at the native resolution, if you have a 19" monitor then you have a point but as we are talking about a 24" which is likely to have a native resolution of 1280 by 1024 then yes you need a beefier card

Legit Reviews - XFX GeForce 8800 GTS 512MB XXX Edition Video Card - Crysis

Although for GTX/new rev GTS money i might even consider a couple of cheap 3870's although power, heat issues put me off really